Buy American? Not the Pentagon who is buying 21 Russian-made choppers

[BloodEclipse]

FOXNews.com - Connecticut GOP Candidates Seize on U.S. Use of Russian Choppers in Afghanistan


Sure lets stimulate other economies than our own. After all we have to hitch a ride to our space station on Russian rockets.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

On the face of it, from the article, it's fishy.

However, none of us know the myriad "deals" that are being made or have been made that has lead to this. It could be that this is some kind of "repayment" for intelligence, or prepayment for certain favors to be called in in the future. We simply cannot know.

Also, it's within the realm of possibility that these Russian helos MIGHT be meant for some uses where an American-made vehicle would mean more danger to those aboard. Not that other nations don't already use American hardware now, but you've got to admit that there's a lot of animosity in the world towards America and American equipment.

-J-

 

[$mooth]

I don't have a problem with buying the Russian helicopters. What I do have a problem is that it was a sole-source contract. Let Sikorsky, Boeing and Augusta have a crack at it too. There's nothing that paticular Helo can do that others can't.

 

[ATOMonkey]

1) The Afghans are set up to fly and maintain the russian birds, not ours.

2) The Mi-17 has better high altitude performance, which is critical in Afghanistan

3) The CIA has been using Russian birds in the rock pile since forever to blend in with the Paki and other birds that fly in and out. US CH-47s (the preferred bird at that altitude) is easily recognizable as American. So, you don't get a lot of rocket fire and random small arms fire, or a group of angry goat humpers at your LZ when you fly on Russian equipment.

 

[BloodEclipse]

I have a huge problem with American tax dollars being spent to support manufacturing in a foreign country. With our economy in the shape it is in, the last thing we need is to be spending money outside the country on items Americans can produce.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I have a huge problem with American tax dollars being spent to support manufacturing in a foreign country. With our economy in the shape it is in, the last thing we need is to be spending money outside the country on items Americans can produce.

I agree. However, since we're fighting a foreign war, concessions to this philosophy will need to be made to conduct it properly.

It's just easier, especially for the Afghans, to fly the Russian birds. They have the training, the parts, the logistics. It just makes sense from an operational stand point.

 

[dross]

The first consideration is the weapon's effectiveness. The second is the economy.

 

[indykid]

If I was flying in a hostile environment like Afghanistan, and I knew that Russian copters were ignored, and US copters were the target of some pretty sophisticated anti-aircraft weapons, it is a no brainer.

Instead of worrying about who made them, or where the money is going, how about worrying about the US lives they might be saving.

 

[Bigum1969]

As a side note, the Russian helicopters look like something my 6-year old designed.

 

[sawgunner74]

as another side note,they have analog gauges,and avionicts that seem like there out of the 1950s,they also are faster, carry more, cost less, easier to maintain(mil- 8 hip mi-24 hind, any)have wayyyyy greater payloads and more firepower and armor protection for crews,plus they are not targets because there russian manufacture.the russians build great submarines and helos.if you want to compare helos( you can use any copy of janes or look it up russian helos) , russian choppers=good.

 

[midget]

Why would you have a problem? If it is better for the job, by all means get it!

Free market dictates that people will buy from who ever offers the best product for the consumer's needs

 

[Expat]

You guys are so right. We should happily support our enemies and continue destroying the economy of this country by buying from Russia or China. Once we get the living standard here down to other third world countries then we should be able to compete. Maybe we can go ahead and sell all of our means of production to the Chicoms now instead of dragging this out so long. I personally welcome the thought of working in one of their fine slave labor factories.

 

[midget]

You guys are so right. We should happily support our enemies and continue destroying the economy of this country by buying from Russia or China. Once we get the living standard here down to other third world countries then we should be able to compete. Maybe we can go ahead and sell all of our means of production to the Chicoms now instead of dragging this out so long. I personally welcome the thought of working in one of their fine slave labor factories.

I wasn't aware that the Russian government owned the companies that we are buying the choppers from.

Forcing our government to buy a more expensive/less capable product will only hurt us in a long run as the money comes directly from our tax dollars.

Free-Market Capitalism will allow our country to prosper...

 

[jeremy]

as another side note,they have analog gauges,and avionicts that seem like there out of the 1950s,they also are faster, carry more, cost less, easier to maintain(mil- 8 hip mi-24 hind, any)have wayyyyy greater payloads and more firepower and armor protection for crews,plus they are not targets because there russian manufacture.the russians build great submarines and helos.if you want to compare helos( you can use any copy of janes or look it up russian helos) , russian choppers=good.

These are some of the biggest POS I have ever flown on. Parts fall off of them faster than Maintenance can put them back on, even when they are new.
Greater Payloads, maybe. If you can keep the dang then in the air. Greater Firepower, LOL... Not even close to what are birds were capable of 40 years ago...
Better Crew Protection, LMAO... How about little to no protection.
*caveat is the Mi-14 Hind series at least as far as protection of the crew...

Russian equipment = third rate junk.
Their guns suck.
The Armor Sucks.
Their Helos suck.

Why would you have a problem? If it is better for the job, by all means get it!

Free market dictates that people will buy from who ever offers the best product for the consumer's needs

My problem is why the heck are we buying a FOREIGN COUNTRY Equipment for THEIR MILITARY. Buy all means buy them the worst crap you can buy. They may use it against us...

 

[Expat]

I think military procurements should be kept in house. If we end up on the opposite side of a war with our military suppliers things could be awkward in asking for parts don't you think?

 

[jeremy]

I think military procurements should be kept in house. If we end up on the opposite side of a war with our military suppliers things could be awkward in asking for parts don't you think?

Definitely.

These Helos are not going to US Forces at all. It has been decreed at least here in RC East US Servicemembers are not PERMITTED to use these Helos. Due to there history, ie parts falling off in flight...
So by all means buy the Afghans crap. If, we must buy them crap.

My problem is why are WE buying them anything?!

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I don't know about the M-17, but older generations of soviet aircraft were built to be easily maintained and repaired under harsh conditions. They are overbuilt, over-engined, and had a design life of something like 600 flight hours.

In addition to their suitablility for the environment, their relatively simple maintenance, and their comparative cost, the Russians also likely have plenty of surplus M-17s around that they can deliver immediately. Sikorsky has its hands full with UH-60M manufacturing and UH-60AtoL rebuilds for the Army; they would probably have to open an S-61 line to build X number of helos for the Afghanis.

 

[midget]

I think military procurements should be kept in house. If we end up on the opposite side of a war with our military suppliers things could be awkward in asking for parts don't you think?

By that very seem logic though, a lot of our air craft suppliers sell to foreign countries. Should they stop? Not to mention there are several gun models currently in the US' arsenal that are not produced state-side...

If what Jeremy says is correct, then we have no business buying their equipment if it is sub-par...

As someone mentioned previously, it was probably all done as some part of an agreement with the Russian government.

 

[tnek]

1) The Afghans are set up to fly and maintain the russian birds, not ours.

2) The Mi-17 has better high altitude performance, which is critical in Afghanistan

3) The CIA has been using Russian birds in the rock pile since forever to blend in with the Paki and other birds that fly in and out. US CH-47s (the preferred bird at that altitude) is easily recognizable as American. So, you don't get a lot of rocket fire and random small arms fire, or a group of angry goat humpers at your LZ when you fly on Russian equipment.

Yup. Some cant see past the end of their nose though.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

You guys are so right. We should happily support our enemies and continue destroying the economy of this country by buying from Russia or China. Once we get the living standard here down to other third world countries then we should be able to compete. Maybe we can go ahead and sell all of our means of production to the Chicoms now instead of dragging this out so long. I personally welcome the thought of working in one of their fine slave labor factories.

If the strategy is to make the Afghanis self-sufficient with a reasonably effective central government, air mobility is probably the way to make it happen. However, the Afghanis don't have the capability to effectively maintain _any_ of our aircraft. The aircraft they _do_ know how to maintain are the MI-17s. Betcha those 21 Russky helos cost less than 5 Sikorsky S-61s.